Quote:
Originally Posted by votivesoul
I understood the context perfectly. What you did was, because those two brothers have a different opinion than you regarding standards, you accused them of not upholding the doctrines of Christ and His apostles. You therefore just flamed them as less of believers than yourself because you don't think they are following the Scriptures properly because they don't see eye to eye with you about outward appearances.
And then you challenged them, insinuating they might believe they can divorce a woman for any reason in contradistinction to what Jesus taught.
It's the old, "have you stopped beating your wife?" trick question. You can't say "yes" because then you admit to beating your wife. You can't say "no" because then it looks like you are continuing to beat your wife. All you can do is try and say "I don't beat my wife". It automatically forces a defensive posture about something the person would otherwise have no reason to be defensive about.
It's a low tactic. And a logical fallacy, along with ad hominem and non-sequitor.
|
I, the author of the text, said that it is not what I meant. You pretend to know everything I thought. What I clarified is what I meant. I don't believe they will or approve divorcing their wife for random reasons. You haven't seen me saying that anywhere else. I am not accusing them either of nothing. I was confronting them with the inevitable consequences of their reasoning regarding the general statement that if it isn't the Law of Moses, it is not a sin.
It is very silly that you are arguing with me about the meaning of what I said; and after me clarifying it, you insist that what I meant to say it is not what I meant to say.
Threaded Mode
